Posts by Linda14

13

For JW lurkers - After Hamburg.................

by BoogerMan in

.......do you still believe the organization's false teaching that romans 6:7 refer to a person's literal death?.

watchtower may 15th 1982, pp.

8,9 - "the bible explains that at death a person is set free or released from any sins he committed.".

Linda14

That's how they publish a fake number of Jehovah's witnesses online when the reality is that that number consists of both baptized and unbaptized publishers. I doubt if they know how many baptized witnesses there is in the world. Even if they know, the 8million + in the peak publishers are not the actual number of Jehovah's witnesses.

13

For JW lurkers - After Hamburg.................

by BoogerMan in

.......do you still believe the organization's false teaching that romans 6:7 refer to a person's literal death?.

watchtower may 15th 1982, pp.

8,9 - "the bible explains that at death a person is set free or released from any sins he committed.".

Linda14

The whole perfection after the 1000 years is laughable. Let's see:

Rev 20:

And I saw thrones, and those who sat on them were given authority to judge. Yes, I saw the souls of those executed for the witness they gave about Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had not worshipped the wild beast or its image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand. And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for 1,000 years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended.) This is the first resurrection."

Take note of the phrase, the REST of the dead did NOT come to LIFE until...

If the group in verse 4 came to life literally through resurrection, it will logically mean that the REST OF THE DEAD not coming to life mean that they weren't LITERALLY resurrected. But the GB assigned one meaning to the first group while assigning a symbolic meaning to the latter group. These guys are smart. They will wish you don't notice

13

Giving hope for all truth-loving people

by Person in

it it not easy for me but i would like to share with you my story and my take on what happend and is happening in jw.

for some my view can be unacceptable for others can be useful.

in fact it can be answer to the question: why am i still even bother what's is going on in this obviously corrupt organization?

Linda14

@Person

Corruption is bad in the eyes of Jehovah. But corruption in God's organization doesn't mean that God has abandoned His organization. Like you said, Jehovah will intervene in the future.

However, do you think that JWs are that God's only organization? And God appointed their "faithful Slave"?

What the GB did was to hijack a statement in the bible and applied it to themselves. They said Jesus and jehivah made inspection in 1914, then in 1919 they appointed the Slave. Isn't that hilarious? Who told you that God made such an inspection and on that date, and that the result of the inspection is chosen they alone as the Slave? Does that even make any sense? Who in history, among the scholars have confirmed that? Did God supernaturally show that His seal was on them? How could someone just hijack a scripture and say 'hey, we were appointed'? There is nothing different from them and other churches who claim to have been called by God. They are one and the same. God didn't say anything, and they can't produce any supernatural evidence for that. That's Hoax.

There is simply no basis for that organization. Serve you God in spirit and in truth. Don't ignore others in other churches who do the same. Don't look at the JWs as the only true religion. That is a hoax.

If your problem is a religion that has root to the first Cong established by the apostles, go to catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches. Or stay in your house and worship in spirit and truth. That doesn't mean that attending Cong meeting is a sin, neither is attending another church service .

23

Is there really any universal issue of Sovereignty?

by Linda14 in

i can agree that satan doesn't see god as a good ruler as stated at gen 3:1-5. he doesn't seem to see gods laws as right or good.

but whether there is an understanding/agreement between god and satan afterward to the effect that he can take the mantle of rulership to show whether his style is best is doubtful.

that conclusion is probably reached because god hasn't destroyed satan, and he is also called the ruler of the world in the bible.

Linda14

I can agree that Satan doesn't see God as a good ruler as stated at Gen 3:1-5. He doesn't seem to see Gods laws as right or good. But whether there is an understanding/agreement between God and Satan afterward to the effect that he can take the mantle of rulership to show whether his style is best is doubtful.

That conclusion is probably reached because God hasn't destroyed Satan, and he is also called the ruler of the world in the bible. So the thought goes that he is left to live because there is an ongoing issue.

I will rather think that Satan is still living because God doesn't always execute judgment immediately.

Satan ruling the world is not that he has absolute control of what goes on in the world. He rules the world of unfaithful mankind simply because those persons have chosen to disobey God's directions and laws. Any who obstinately disobey God is not reckoned as under God's rulership, as such to the opposing side, Satan. Before their destruction, Satan has authority over these persons since they wish to do things contrary to God's will. Since God's judgment doesn't come immediately, Satan just have a field day.

However, God is still in charge, and can hold them responsible for what they do any day, any time He decides. There is no prove-me-wrong senario here.

If there is any prove-me-wrong senario, I don't think God would immediately pass a death sentence on Satan in Eden. Gen 3:15. What will be the need for the contest when your fellow contestant is already been judged to be a loser and will be killed? If there is any contest, God won't destroy people with deluge and Sodom with fire and then the contest is still ongoing.

I mean why kill persons who are obviously enjoying Satan's rulership? Did the majority say that they were tired of the world they lived in or they were tired of the way they lived their lives? God didn't destroy them because they were tired of their lifestyle, but because their sin was too much for God to bear. It is true that there were outcry against Sodom, but probably Lot and few others had that perception, but not the majority in Sodom. So it appears that what is termed good rulership is what God sees as good, not necessarily what Satan or his followers see as good. If that is the case, there is no contest here.

If you think about it, majority still see God's standard as too restrictive and bad for them. They rather prefer independence as the best option. Will that make Satan a winner of the contest? If not, what will? I don't think that majority will one day want God's rulership. But God will still destroy them if they don't choose to obey HIM. So God is and will always be the ruler. That He allows bad people to stay temporarily doesn't mean that He wants to prove anything, but He is loving, patient, doesn't quickly execute judgment because we're free moral agents.

We are created to make our own decisions, God won't always let those who disobey Him to live. He will destroy them, but He doesn't do so immediately. That time lag makes the wicked and Satan to cause problem for the just.

We don't want to forget the fact that God was the ruler of the kingdom of Israel. This is obviously because Abraham accepted to follow His laws. There came his descendants. For God to rule Israel is a bridge of contract if the issue of Eden is true. God even intervened and appointed some kings in another lands like Syria. At Dan 5;21 he stated that He has authority to appoint and remove kings and that He is the king in the kingdom of mankind. That would have been a brigde of contract. He calls all kings as being his ministers as well.

However, since these kings might chose to disobey God and even worship demons, God normally let them be and Satan will control them. That doesn't mean that if God wants to intervene in those rulership He wouldn't. He is always in charge.

14

spiritually sick

by enoughisenough in

i thought of this today.

when i first told a certain person i didn't believe the gb were the faithful slave, that person told me i was spiritually sick....even bought me flowers.

i threw the vase away because i couldn't look at it without thinking how i was judged spiritually sick.

Linda14

2 Tim 3:6 do probably refer to spiritual weakness.

I don't see your statement to warrant the conclusion that you're spiritually sick. No. But that witness is following the view of the GB, which is that any who starts to criticize the GB is spiritually weak. Quite frankly, any GB follower, who is deep in their teachings would likely feel that you're sick if you say that of their 'God appointed Faithful Slave'.

Remember that those guys haven't woken up, so they don't understand nor are ready to understand your view.

19

Are Jehovah's Witnesses who are disfellowshipped allowed to communicate and comfort each other while waiting to be reinstated?

by Vanderhoven7 in

i just read about a disfellowshipped person who was looking for other disfellowshipped persons to socialize with.

what does the org have to say about this?.

Linda14

The disfellowshiping policy is cruel and mean. Let Jehovah judge them for their chasing away His worshipers. Well, worship of God has no link with the watchtower. You worship God in spirit and truth.

63

Jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the Gentile Times are Fulfilled. — Luke 21:24

by Fisherman in

jerusalem will be trampled by the nations until the gentile times are fulfilled.

— luke 21:24 .

the bible book of luke records jesus prophecy of the last day with his parousia including the verse about the gentile times.

Linda14

Fisherman

When has the word "Jerusalem" been figuratively referred to as rulership? The WT is saying that they word "Jerusalem" in the Luke refers to Davidic line of rulers. Granted, that city is the capital where rulers sat, and those were said to seat on Jehovah's throne, but for the meaning the WT associates with that Book of Luke to make sense, there has to be a place in the bible where the word "Jerusalem" would figuratively mean rulership. If not, changing the word Jerusalem in Luke to mean davidic line of rulers would not make sense. There is simply no basis for that.

So Luke 21:24 is about the city Jerusalem. That it will be trampled on... Destroyed by the Nations. That statement makes sense since Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem. Jerusalem was not by then in ruins, hence the foretold trampling/destruction.

69

Did Jesus COME with the clouds of heaven in 1914?

by Fisherman in

take for example revelation 21: 10. .

“….and he showed me the holy city jerusalem coming down out of heaven from god.

here john sees something happening, action.

Linda14

Christs coming as stated at Matt 24:30 is the same as Matt 24:3. That is the sign of his presence Jesus was talking about. When perhaps that heavenly quaking starts happening, that's the sign that the son of man has come, his presence. Some activities would happen during this presence period. The sign of Christs presence is the same as the "end" and also the "conclusion of the system of things". Watchtower is overloading this 1914 with a whole lot.

When Jesus starts his kingdom, he will rule the world, he won't be sharing rulership with worldly government. See how the bible puts it.

15 The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”

If Jesus became king in 1914, then he is now the ruler of the world, and not Satan. Revelation from 11:17 states that judgment will follow that rulership.

It should also be noted that contrary to what watchtower teach, the throne of David was not vacant when Jesus came in the first century. In fact, Jesus made a triumphant entry into Jerusalem as a king in fulfillment of the book of Zechariah. So the seat was not vacant. He was even born a king. Dan 9:5-10. When asked by Pilate, Jesus didn't say "well I am not a king". Jesus metaphysically agreed that he was a king, but that his kingdom is not of this world. In his torture stake, it was posted "king of the Jews".

So watchtower is wrong by saying that the throne of David was vacant till 1914. Jesus first kingship was not expected to last forever. He was expected to be killed. That didn't mean he was never a king. To Jehovah he has fulfilled an aspect of the prophesy meant for that period. The next will come when he takes over rulership from worldly rulers, then rule the world.

28

Should Jehovah's Witnesses Trust the Governing Body?

by Vanderhoven7 in

if there is evidence that jesus invisibly chose specific men at headquarters in brooklyn new york in 1919 to be his faithful slave and that mandate and ability passed on to future directors...then the answer might just be a resounding maybe.. what is the evidence for this invisible appointment and what is the evidence that this is just watchtower mythology?.

i hope jws like scholar and fisherman will explain why the trust the gb.. i must be honest, i see no evidence at all to put trust in either the 1919 selection or the current men taking the lead in warwick.

.

Linda14

It is very doubtful that Jehovah chose the GB in 1919 as the only channel on earth as they claim. I can only say that God would save honest hearted people in all Jesus believing Churches, the JWs inclusive. Some among the GB might be sincere, and might get God's approval individually. The same with all Jehovah's witnesses and all church goers and church leaders. There is that possibility.

However, their stating that God uses them exclusively, you're the only channel, even makes me wonder if God would ever save any with that mentality. Why? Because that is blasphemy to state that the holy spirit led you to one teaching, and later pronouncing the earlier teaching the holy spirit led you to as falsehood. Even saying that you are God's only channel on earth is bogus. It carries serious consequences if Jehovah truly didn't tell you that. And the reasons for making such a bogus claim is too weak. Sometimes I wonder if these guys think it's a joke.

It is doubtful, and I would have said totally impossible for God to choose a group from among the rest without letting them know that fact DIVINELY. Jehovah would have communicated such either through a vision, miraculous works, dreams, angel appearance, fulfilled prophecies etc. When God did that in the first century, he openly supplied abundant miracles to prove that He has shifted His attention from Judaism to Christianity.

When God chose a prophet, He always makes it's clear to the one he chose.

The WT would have been better had they gone on with providing meeting materials for any group that wishes to get those materials, and not forming another religion. If God has not appeared to you, you shouldn't form a religion without his approval. That would be presumptuousness. No matter how bad the Christianity has become, you can do your worship in your house, and not go as far as forming a religion.

Well, we leave God to judge them, but I can only trust my Bible. There is no reason to even trust them. They have a track record of doctrinal errors. Why trust such a group to define what you believe?

11

Salvation: Faith alone OR works?

by JW Answers in

jehovah's witnesses run to the book of james staying that faith without works is dead.

they completely ignore the teachings of paul and hold onto james.

.. it would appear that there is a contradiction between james' teaching and paul's teaching, yet the bible tells us to rightly divide the word of truth.

Linda14

Faith basically. Works is essential as well but what gives you salvation is not that work, but faith.

Think of that criminal at the stake/cross. What saved him? Works? No, just faith in Jesus.

Think about those whom Jesus told when he was on earth, "your sins have been forgiven". That means had the kingdom come that day, they will be saved. What saved them, works? No. Faith.

What about many persons that were baptized those days, they didn't live many years studying What Does The Bible Really Teach book and then having their lives policed to determine if they are repentant before they were baptized. All they needed was to believe in Jesus and state that they have repented, they were baptized. In the case of Cornelius and those invited for the occasion, they received the holy spirit immediately. Don't imagine that those were spotless.

Works are essential, but nothing can deter God from declaring any sinner righteous and beckon him to the kingdom through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus. Nothing. So it's not good to think that one can earn salvation which works seem to emphasize. Neither would it be fine to deliberately become wicked in words and action and think that just having faith in Jesus will cover you. No.